Barry Spock Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 >Sorry, I didn't mean for this to be a Apple vs MS debate. I know, I didn't want to get into that either, but you're right. OS X was at its height one or two iterations ago but artificially merging the mobile and desktop oses is a mistake. People can cope with them having differnt styles. they are different kinds of (hardware) tools. I hadn't used windows in a real way for years, but installed W7 just the other week, and I like it. I don't have an answer for what they should have done with windows8 but it looks like they've just added another layer between the user and the data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cursed Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 One thing I would say though is that with Lion, Apple haven't merged OSX and iOS to the extent Microsoft seems to be trying to with Windows 8. They added Launchpad (Something I don't use) as well as fullscreen apps and a few aesthetic touches like iOS scrollbars. I don't think they've gone too overboard though since you can still use Lion as if it was Snow Leopard, Leopard etc. With Windows 8 replacing the start menu with the tiles interface there isn't really any way of avoiding it. Being able to seamlessly transfer files between platforms is all well and good, but when you have to make compromises on either the desktop or mobile end of the spectrum it isn't good. Making a Windows 7/Windows Phone hybrid and sticking it on desktops, laptops and tablets isn't going to work because you'll have to compromise on both tablets and PCs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverTheBelow Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 Microsoft has a long standing tradition of trying to be a copycat while acting like they are original. I've noticed that Apple do that a hell of alot more than Microsoft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uNi Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 Was anyone able to run it on VirtualBox? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoječ Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 Yup, it runs flawlessly. I heard some poeple had problems when they defined less than 2 cores to be available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uNi Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 Yeah, missed that one, is installing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xrCore Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 The metro UI sucks on a netbook. It was obviously made for tablets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminicus Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 The metro UI sucks on a netbook. It was obviously made for tablets. You are a f*cking idiot. You can access the standard Desktop from on of the App launchers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SyphonPayne Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 The metro UI sucks on a netbook. It was obviously made for tablets. You are a f*cking idiot. You can access the standard Desktop from on of the App launchers. Desktop UI != Metro UI. That being said, I still think MS has a ways to go with the new UI improvements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn 7 five 11 Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 I see the points some have made about flawlessly being able to connect with each other, thats all well and good if i want my Windows 8 phone, laptop and pc to be seamlessly coordinating with each other. But what if i don't? This interface makes coordination convenient at the cost of normal pc convenience. I could see this being fixed by giving the PC version more customizability, they could add a classic view option or at least have a windows start bar available, for the seamless syncers you can use the new interface, for the user who does not require that they can switch to a more pc functional view. This way is more difficult, but it doesn't handicap either user. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightwalker83 Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 I am trying to install the Windows 8 preview on a VM at the moment but I'm not having much luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoječ Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 I am trying to install the Windows 8 preview on a VM at the moment but I'm not having much luck. I heard some poeple had problems when they defined less than 2 cores to be available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zilcho Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 To be honest, I'm really not liking the look of this for the same reasons outlined by others - it just comes across to me as retarded. Sure, seamless integration is an important target but I've always like having the desktop as it was, a desktop. If I want that sort of interface, I'll buy a Window phone. U R B A N I T A S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightwalker83 Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 Microsoft has a long standing tradition of trying to be a copycat while acting like they are original. I've noticed that Apple do that a hell of alot more than Microsoft. And yet we the user get in trouble if we want to create something based on something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminicus Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 @SyphonPayne Umm, no dude. The Metro UI isn't the Desktop UI. The Desktop UI is the same f*cking UI we've had since Windows 3.1 with a Start button, taskbar. Don't confuse the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider-Vice Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 I am trying to install the Windows 8 preview on a VM at the moment but I'm not having much luck. It won't work if your CPU doesn't support VT-x or the AMD equivalent. GTANet | Red Dead Network | black lives matter | stop Asian hate | trans lives = human lives the beginning is moments ago, the end is moments away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightwalker83 Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 I am trying to install the Windows 8 preview on a VM at the moment but I'm not having much luck. It won't work if your CPU doesn't support VT-x or the AMD equivalent. Ah ok! Although, I finally managed to get it working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminicus Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Windows 8 will work on any modern PC hardware. Geez, people go read about it before spouting stupid sh*t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverTheBelow Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Windows 8 will work on any modern PC hardware. Geez, people go read about it before spouting stupid sh*t. It won't if you're trying to run it as a virtual OS, which is what these people "spouting sh*t" are actually talking about. You need virtualization or the AMD equivalent to run it inside Windows 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightwalker83 Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I finally managed to install it on my pc! I had to burn the iso to dvd then boot from the cd to install it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SyphonPayne Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I just used a USB flash drive for one and an external HDD for another install on two machines. Saves DVDs. Also installs faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightwalker83 Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I just used a USB flash drive for one and an external HDD for another install on two machines. Saves DVDs. Also installs faster. Yeah, I know but every time I tried to boot off of my USB via my pc I received "NTLDR is missing!". Maybe it was because I had both versions on my USB at the time but it should be able to tell the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminicus Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Windows 8 will work on any modern PC hardware. Geez, people go read about it before spouting stupid sh*t. It won't if you're trying to run it as a virtual OS, which is what these people "spouting sh*t" are actually talking about. You need virtualization or the AMD equivalent to run it inside Windows 7. A virtual machine is virtualization you dumb ass. And it will because I have it running on a VM in Windows 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf68k Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 @Iminicus He means virtualization technology in the CPU. Intel calls it Virtualization Technology for Directed or VT-d or just VT AMD calls it AMD Virtualization or AMD-Vi As of this moment I can't prove this but it might be possible to use VMWare to run Win8 on a Win7 system with a CPU that does not support VT. But to run Win8 inside of Win7's own virtualization then yes you need a CPU with VT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now